The device is also said to contain a pedometer and other health-related sensors.

Apple's so-called "iWatch" may launch as soon as this year and is expected to run a full version of iOS. The timing details were first reported by Bloomberg, who cited sources saying Apple designer Jony Ive has had a longtime interest in watches. The Verge then corroborated Bloomberg's report, adding that its own sources said a full version of iOS is a possibility, but battery life challenges continued to plague the design team.

According to The Verge's sources, Ive is personally leading the iWatch team with roughly 100 engineers—a number previously reported by Bloomberg. "Interestingly, we're also told that Apple's chosen to rework the full iOS to run on the watch instead of building up the iPod nano's proprietary touch operating system—although the previous nano was already watch-sized and seemed like a great starting point for a wrist-sized device, Apple's betting on iOS across product lines," wrote the Verge's Nilay Patel.

But this has apparently caused issues during development, with the watch's battery life only lasting a couple of days. The team would rather the device last for 4-5 days before a recharge, meaning there's still some work left to be done before the design can be finalized. According to Bloomberg, it won't just be an iOS-running watch, either. The device will apparently compete with products like the Nike FuelBand and fitbit by housing its own pedometer (like the iPod nano) and other sensors for health data—these additions make sense and indicate that Apple is trying to offer a more general lifestyle solution than just something that tells time.

Reports that Apple was putting real resources behind an iWatch surfaced last month and have been snowballing ever since. In fact, Bloomberg's report from last month claimed this was only one of several wearable experiments at Apple. What the device will ultimately look like is anyone's guess, although a recently published patent application described a slap-bracelet-like functionality, one of no doubt many options being considered by Jony Ive and team.

Jacqui Cheng
Jacqui is an Editor at Large at Ars Technica, where she has spent the last eight years writing about Apple culture, gadgets, social networking, privacy, and more. Emailjacqui@arstechnica.com//Twitter@eJacqui

Recharge my phone every few days? This sounds like some sort of failure. Most people wearing a watch do it as jewelry now, just about everyone has a phone. I don't wear a watch, I just look at my smartphone.

Whats the purpose of having a smartphone and a watch that does very similar tasks at an even smaller screen; and a watch that isn't really going to be stylish but tech-geek? How will touch really work on such a small screen with tiny controls on apps?

Then to top it off I need to keep my phone and watch both recharged every few days? I don't think so. If I'm spending a few hundred dollars its going to be on a really nice watch or a really nice smartphone; not some Frankenstein combination of the two.

This is the kind of dumb product that Apple would produce in the 90's when they had no ideas left, I suspect they are back on that path again without Jobs.

Hmm. Assuming these rumors are true, I am enjoying reading the commentary. It gives me nostalgia for similar rumor articles circa Winter 2009-2010 about Apple's iTablet. The exact same tone of incredulous skepticism and even some of the same objections, almost word-for-word.Not to say (again assuming the rumor is true) that this thing will have the sucess of the iPad; but people shouldn't be dismissing it so readily, especially based on rumor alone.

I have an iPad and an Android phone. Unless the watch has cell capability and you can bluetooth it to an earpiece I can't see the point of having another device I need to charge that is completely redundant.

But then again, weirder stuff has sold. Remember pet rocks? And I already had plenty of rocks...

Recharge my phone every few days? This sounds like some sort of failure. Most people wearing a watch do it as jewelry now, just about everyone has a phone. I don't wear a watch, I just look at my smartphone.

Whats the purpose of having a smartphone and a watch that does very similar tasks at an even smaller screen; and a watch that isn't really going to be stylish more than tech-geek.

Then top top it off I need to keep my phone and watch both recharged every few days? I don't think so.

This is the kind of dumb product that Apple would produce in the 90's when they had really no real ideas left, I suspect they are back on that path again without Jobs.

If this is running full iOS, there's a good chance they'll be looking at being able to make calls with it, probably using a bluetooth headset. Also, Jobs had some fair stinkers himself, like the Apple Lisa

I am supportive of a watchlike device that is integrated with my phone. I like the idea of getting notificatoins on it.

One example came to my mind as I sit here typing this message. If I got a message, missed call, update, alarm, reminder, etc, It would be interesting if that showed up on my watch. While typing I could glance down and see the update and decide if it merits my attention now (and then allow me to pull out my iphone/ipad) or if I should keep on typing/working.

Its fixes a minor inconvenience but if the price is right it could be on my holiday 'want' list.

I used to wear a watch (until it got stolen from me in a locker room), and I don't know what winter conditions are where you live, but where I live the last thing I want to have to do around 5 months of every year is to open up my jacket so I can pull my phone out of my pants pocket and fiddle with it to check what time it is...

An iOS watch that integrates with my phone, has pedometer and stuff like that? Yes please. Bring it on. Just make sure there's a retina-like display on it so numbers and graphics are pin-sharp.

Quote:

Then top top it off I need to keep my phone and watch both recharged every few days? I don't think so.

Others are saying this is completely redundant, but I find it to be a pain to take my phone out to see the time and notifications. Also, if such a device could run normally for 4-5 days, maybe it could do some heavy-duty geofencing while recharging every day. That would have some game changing potential.

This needs to incorporate motion -> electrical conversion to work well. Even if you're only recovering 50% of the power you expect to use you double the battery life. More so, a color e-ink or Mirasol-style display would really help with battery life.

I'm sure there will be overlapping capabilities just as there are currently between the iPhone and iPad and the iPad and a MacBook. And yet all those devices still sell and serve a distribution of usage scenarios. Don't undervalue the extension of form factors to something smaller than a phone that can do a subset of what the phone is capable of. Let's wait until the release to see what it can really do. I expect the most powerful combination will be to have a watch + phone or watch + tablet working as an ensemble. The larger device has the processing power (and possibly antennae) that the watch utilizes to act as a real-time display that's a bit more discreet than walking around with one's nose 18" from a phone.

This has the same problem that was brought up during talks about a lower-cost iPhone. Even if it is an awesome product and sells great, the volume is not high enough and the margins are not big enough in dollars per unit to make any meaningful difference to Apple's bottom line. The Bloomberg article says it could be a $6 billion opportunity which sounds nice, but Apple's revenue in the last 4 quarters was $164 billion. Is this really the next big thing then?

Recharge my phone every few days? This sounds like some sort of failure. Most people wearing a watch do it as jewelry now, just about everyone has a phone. I don't wear a watch, I just look at my smartphone.

Whats the purpose of having a smartphone and a watch that does very similar tasks at an even smaller screen; and a watch that isn't really going to be stylish more than tech-geek.

Then top top it off I need to keep my phone and watch both recharged every few days? I don't think so.

This is the kind of dumb product that Apple would produce in the 90's when they had really no real ideas left, I suspect they are back on that path again without Jobs.

If this is running full iOS, there's a good chance they'll be looking at being able to make calls with it, probably using a bluetooth headset. Also, Jobs had some fair stinkers himself, like the Apple Lisa

How are you supposed to navigate iOS on a tiny 1-2 inch screen? When your finger tips are about half an inch already? Navigate the screen with siri? doesn't sound like a great experience.

The idea of making phone calls sounds good in theory but the battery life on a watch isn't going to be greater than a couple hours of phone calls. This device sounds more like a toy than actually being useful. You also wouldn't need to use full iOS just for phone calls.

Sounds like this could be a secondary device and will need another iOS device for you to add new contacts, edit contacts from. At that point if I already have an iPhone why do I need a watch that barely does half of that and looks ridiculous?

somewhat defeats the purpose of a watch if you have to keep charging it in order for it to work.

They should make this an e-ink device and then you have something that could possibly last weeks.... not days.

I know in our house we have gone back to e-ink devices (kindle paper white) for our e-readers instead of tablet options weight being one factor, but batter life being the biggest! I dont like having to charge my books

I imagine that it's intended to complement the iPhone's functionality, but the level of redundancy will be staggering. This is going to be a hard sell.

My estimation is that there is a group of people who will purchase this product because of the Apple name alone and try to force it into their lifestyle, which IMO is the worst thing you can do with technology. I'm sure it will have legitimate uses, but I would be interested in seeing how many purchase it based on a real 'need' for it.

Don't get me wrong, I will be interested in seeing how they will handle an iWatch - I'm just not buying one. I'm assuming it will link directly to an iPhone and allow you to check basic notifications/data through your iPhone (along with some standard smartwatch features).

It will be interesting to see if Apple can affect the current 'time-keeping' device paradigm. I know there still is a solid market for watches, but I'm sure if you ask people for the time they will instinctively just reach into their pocket. The phone has become the defacto time-keeping device for the population today, I'd like so see if Apple can actually change this paradigm.

As someone who owns a Pebble watch, and has been using it for about 2-3 weeks now, I'm definitely interested. The Pebble has some pretty annoying OS flaws that need to be ironed out, and it just doesn't have the usability that an Apple product would have. But it's quite nice to keep my phone in my pocket, and just be able to glance at my watch to see who's calling or who sent me a text.

And the complaints about needing to recharge it aren't an issue. I get about 5-7 days out of this watch. As I'm sitting down at my computer, I just plug it into a USB cord and it charges. I didn't think that I'd ever want to deal with charging my phone every day, switching from a dumb phone that could go a week without charging. Yet here I am now, charging my phone every night without even thinking of it.

If they go with an e-ink screen, then couldn't they get the battery to last much, much longer? I'm hoping they do something like that, as I've been wanting for a high-tech watch, but don't want it to be tied to another device or have to be something I need to constantly recharge like my phone.

Don't miss the wrist for the watch. Apple doesn't do watches; it does platforms. Sensors on the wrist can deliver significant medical and exercise information. In the next five to ten years, this info link might become a critical health and insurance function. Put emergency alerts on it for disabled and old folks. Include localized Siri for timers and reminders. OK, add a clock etc. Apple loves the challenge of small and simple gear. And it loves disruption. Nobody does them better. At $200 it will sell a billiard.

Do you wear your watch in bed? In the shower? If it can use wireless recharging, you could just put it on your bedside table.

Electric toothbrushes are a pain because not every house has an outlet in the bathroom, meaning you have to charge in another room. But a watch you can just charge from your nightstand wouldn't be that bad.

About the charging thing every few days or so. I wear a watch and take it off at bed time. I set it on my bedside cabinet, not much more effort to set it on a charging station. I think this is not as big a problem as has been suggested. More important is the functionality of the device.

I'll get one if they added ANT+ support for sensors, and possibly accelerometers for swim metrics. (This move BTW would likely push Garmin and Timex and Polar products out of the market.) I've got an HR band, a cadence and speed sensor, and a powertap paired to my Garmin 910.

Tech has improved considerably since then. Watches either wind themselves now or use batteries that last months at a time. If you actually wear watches, this sort of iWatch seems silly. Of course Apple isn't going for that market. It never does. It doesn't cater to the early adopter or the power user.

I can see tons of applications for this thing, outside of just convenience of not having to dig out / have your phone on-hand at all times. It'd be great to leave my phone/ipad/mac docked while I'm at home and use the watch to keep tabs of what's going on. It'd be great if it incorporates a 2-factor security function that allows me to unlock my mac or i-devices with password + proximity or something. I'd appreciate built-in fitness functionality of pedometer, gps, etc in a slimmer form factor than my iPhone. If it is bluetooth 4.0 compliant and can leverage all of the ANT+ sensors for things like bike cadence etc., even better.

Way too early to call this a dud or a hit, imo. I look forward to learning more.

This is the kind of dumb product that Apple would produce in the 90's when they had no ideas left, I suspect they are back on that path again without Jobs.

Just like the iPhone was a "dumb product" from a company with "no ideas left." Apple is capable of transforming the smartwatch exactly like they did the smartphone. Remember smartphone life before the iPhone? I can picture you sitting around in 2004, saying the exact same thing about the iPhone LOL. "We don't need no stinking touch screen phone that needs to be charged every day! DUMB!"

I'll get one if they added ANT+ support for sensors, and possibly accelerometers for swim metrics. (This move BTW would likely push Garmin and Timex and Polar products out of the market.) I've got an HR band, a cadence and speed sensor, and a powertap paired to my Garmin 910.

Low power BT is way more likely than ANT - my HRM, FitBit and my speed/cadence sensors are all BT4 and all work wonderfully with Strava, Endomondo etc.....

I don't understand the criticism. It may be slightly redundant with other devices, but it increases accessability and makes certain tasks easier. Isn't that what technology is all about? Think about it some more and I'm sure that some creative uses for how this could improve things for you would come to mind.

I can think of many potential uses for this. I'm excited for it, but also worried that it will fall short of what I'm anticipating. At the bare minimum, if it can handle basic watch functions and relay texts and incoming calls, I'd be pleased. The theoretical possibilities of what can happen beyond that are seemingly endless: gesture controls, Siri control, application control and synchronization, the health sensors that people have mentioned… none of this is exciting to people? Really?!

I agree with you. Don't forget about the Power Mac G4 Cube, that was a $1,799 stinker. Also, the iPod Hi-Fi was a $349 stinker too. Funny that people are so quick to anticipate the demise of Apple because of a product that may or may not be a win. The iWatch is a rumor, it is not even a real product yet. People comment on it like it is a real product. Just like the phantom HDTV that resurfaces in the news from time to time. I would have no interest in an iWatch, but some people might find it useful. I prefer my watch to run for years without having to remember to recharge it.

somewhat defeats the purpose of a watch if you have to keep charging it in order for it to work.

They should make this an e-ink device and then you have something that could possibly last weeks.... not days.

I know in our house we have gone back to e-ink devices (kindle paper white) for our e-readers instead of tablet options weight being one factor, but batter life being the biggest! I dont like having to charge my books

I know the moniker "iwatch" has stuck and god forbid that Apple falls for it and uses it, but its not a watch!

Imagine if you will that you could strike from your mind any and all associations you've made with "(wrist)watch" and could start with a blank slate to imagine a device that resides on your hand.

To be honest the real challenge will be getting folks to abandon a century old concept and embracing something different.